• 2 Posts
  • 91 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: November 8th, 2022

help-circle

  • _NoName_@lemmy.mltoAsklemmy@lemmy.mlAm I insane?
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    18 days ago

    Eh, if you have the money, it’s probably fine.

    My current weird things:

    • Switched from my normal time zone to UTC on all my clocks.
    • Chose to study Esperanto instead of a more practical language because of its past of hopefulness
    • Plan on switching to a 13-month calendar in the future (is going to require modifying the opensource calendar I use to allow the change)
    • Switched to barefoot shoes not for health but the diminished cost in materials.
    • changed my keyboard to a dactyl manuform for the hell of it.
    • changed my keyboard scheme to Dvorak now.
    • changed my videogame control scheme from wasd to dcxf to accommodate the keyboard (in Dvorak that’s exku).

    We’re all alittle eccentric. Some of us more than others.









  • Alright, I see what you’re saying now. We’re on the same page.

    As an additional thing regarding AGI, I think it should be noted that ‘human-level’ and ‘human-like’ are importantly distinct when talking about this topic.

    In reality, if an AGI is ever created, it will most likely not be human-like at all. Humans think the way we do out of an evolutionary conditioning for survival, a history an AGI will not be coming from. One example given by Robert Miles is a staple making machine becoming an ASI, where it essentially would exist solely to make as many staples as it could with its hyperintelligence.

    We mean to say that this AGI is a ‘human-level’ intelligence in that it can learn to utilize abstractions and tools, be able to function in a large variety of environments without intervention or training, and be able to learn in a realtime fashion.

    Obviously, these criteria for any AI shows just how far away we are from achieving anything right now.these concepts are very vague and the arguments for each one’s impossibility or inevitability are equally vague and philosophical. It’s still mostly just stuffy academics arguing with each other.

    One statement I agree with, though, comes from the AI safety collective: We don’t know what we’re doing, and we should really sort that out. If any of this is actually possible and we accidentally make an AGI/ASI before having any failsafes or contingencies, it could be very bad.


  • I am not bait-and-switching here. The switchers were the business-minded grifters which made the term synonymous with LLMs and eventually destroyed its meaning completely.

    The definition I gave is from the most popular and widely used CS textbook on AI and has been the meaning used in the field since the early 90s. It’s why videogame NPCs are always called AI, because they fit the conventional CS definition, and were one of the major things it was about the most.

    As for your ‘1’, AI is a wide-but-very-specialized field and pertains from everything from robots to text autocomplete. If you want the most out of it, you need to get down into the nitty gritty and really research the field.

    On a Seperate note, while AI safety, AGI, and the risk of the intelligence explosion are somewhat related to computer science’s pursuit of AI systems, they are much more philosophical currently, and adhere to much vaguer definitions of AI, Such as Alan Turing’s.


  • IIRC, within computer science, which is the field most heavily driving AI design and research forward, an ‘intelligent agent’ is essentially defined as any ‘agent’ which takes external stimulai from a collection of sensors in some form of environment, processes that stimulai in a dynamic fashion (one of the criteria IIRC is a branching decision tree based on the stimulai), and then applies that processing to a collection of affectors in the environment.

    Yes, this definition is an extremely low bar and includes a massive amount of code, software and scripts. It also includes basic natural intelligences such as worms, ants, amoeba, and even viruses. One example of mechanical AI are some of Theo Jansen’s StrandBeasts









  • I mean, I think alittle? Not because of the reasons you think, though, and it’s not really ‘your fault’. More of a pitfall that most people fall into.

    TLDR: ditch the apps and try to get out into more social situations through clubs and sports. The ‘right one’ will come along when you are more socially able an mm you’ll likely make friends along the way (genuine friends are WAY more important for staying sane).

    So, tinder specifically objectifies and compresses you into a blurb and some photos - it basically cans you for mass consumption. When you finally get ‘bought’, you only get a chat box to communicate unless you actually exchange contacts, and the whole thing’s kind of terrible in general because of that. I’ve tried bumble and it’s pretty much a similar thing.

    There’s this thing sometimes called the ‘predator/prey relationship model’ by feminists, and dating apps explicitly reinforce this model, with the only minor change being that bumble required the woman to open the interaction. The predator/prey relationship makes it so that in our society, dudes are expected to go out, find a random woman they fancy, and ‘pounce’ them, essentially. Originally, this was quite literal if you have heard some stories of relationships starting in the 40s and 50s where a couple got together because the guy was just constantly unrelenting. This has shifted to being more egalitarian and consensual but still requires the guy to basically peacock to gain the woman’s approval. Once it officially becomes a relationship, the woman is expected to be submissive while the man is expected to be dominant. It’s a pretty old-fashioned relationship style that still affects modern dating today. Some folks even still subscribe to it.

    The better model that I think is more natural is to just go out and find new friends and groups I can participate in. This way, anyone you might date sees you in more context. You get more practice being social, which can be helpful in actually getting someone to become attracted to you, at which point they might actually start putting in effort.